[Leica] first time M6 user

[Byron Rakitzis <byron@rakitzis.com>]

Hi,

I thought I'd write in with my first Leica impressions. I hope this list
welcomes messages from newcomers.

First of all, I should say I'm an amateur and I've been using Nikon
equipment for years, and most recently Hasselblad. I print my own B&W's
at home.

After I found out that Keeble & Shuchat in Palo Alto rents out an M6
outfit, I took one with me on a trip to Europe around Thanksgiving week.
I wanted to bring something quite portable with me, and I also wanted
to see what all the excitement was behind the M system.

The use of the camera was quite straightforward. I am accustomed to
manual controls from my Nikon F, and also from the Hasselblad. In fact,
the Leica is the first camera I've used in a while with a built-in meter so
you can imagine that my perspective on automation is somewhat distorted!

All the things that people rave about in the use of a Leica I can confirm:
the softly-clicking shutter and smooth advance. Learning to use the
rangefinder was not really a problem, and I spend enough effort anyway
trying to visualize depth of field that I didn't really miss a ground
glass to focus on.

This aspect of the camera made the best impression with me: without really
being easier to use than a point-and-shoot, it still gave me a feeling of
great ease-of-use and control at the same time. So more than anything,
the Leica changes the way I take pictures. I guess the difference with
a point-and-shoot is that I don't like giving up control to the camera.
So "point-and-shoot" should really be "point-and-hope".

Given that I haven't spent all that much time in the darkroom since
my trip, I can't really comment on the fabled quality of Leitz lenses.
I've made some enlargements at 8x10 and they are exactly what I'd expect
from any fine 35mm lens; fine for what they are, but even at 8x10 they
don't compare to the results you get from a 6x6 negative.

I don't really want to go too deeply into this subject because I think
it gets into the whole issue of Gear Acquisition Syndrome: as I've seen
recently on LUG, once people start comparing the performance of one 50mm
lens stopped down to 5.6 over another 50mm lens stopped down to 5.6 it
makes me wonder if this has any relation to actual photography or if
it's become an academic exercise in lens testing.

As a sufferer of Gear Acquisition Syndrome myself I try to catch myself
before falling victim to another bout of this disease.

I guess I can summarize it this way: I'm charmed by the Leica M system,
and while I value it for its craftmanship, and for its ease of use,
it's still just a 35mm camera. I'll take it on faith that the lenses
are good, but there are some lenses in my Nikon lineup (105/2.5, 20/2.8)
that I feel are also without equal. When I have the time and energy on
my hands, though, I'm going to be using the Hasselblad.

That being said, I went out and got an M6 with 35mm/f2 lens last
week. I'll be taking it out on the slopes when I visit family on my
wife's side this xmas. I can't ever see getting more than 50mm and 90mm
lenses for this camera, so I sympathize with the contributor who wished
that the tri-elmar had those 3 focal lengths.

I hope these comments are accepted in the spirit with which they were
written,

Byron.